Counter-UAS System
Employee #3 at a counter-drone startup that grew from 4 to 50 people and raised $14M+. Detection and mitigation by protocol takeover rather than RF jamming.
WhiteFox Defense · 2017–2019
This case study is still an outline — the facts below are verified, the writing isn't finished.
Why protocol takeover matters
The system presented itself to a drone as its new controller rather than jamming its signal. That distinction is the whole product.
RF jamming is heavily restricted for domestic US use. Non-jamming protocol takeover is the commercially and legally viable approach, and it's the reason a counter-drone system can be fielded somewhere with civilians in it at all. Anyone working in this space understands the difference immediately.
The role
Employee #3. The company went from 4 to 50 people and raised $14M+ during my time there.
I directed engineering operations — development strategy, scheduling, scope planning, and financial management — across a ~$400K annual engineering budget with two direct reports. I also ran technical due diligence for fundraising, which in practice meant owning whether the product demo worked when investors were in the room.
Implemented the company's first ERP/MRP system, which gave us material and inventory tracking we hadn't had and measurably improved manufacturing reliability.
On the title
Director of Engineering Operations was a generous title for a first job out of college, and I'd rather say so than have someone wonder. Employee #3 at a company that reached 50 people and raised $14M is the part that actually means something.